Should cycling two abreast be allowed?

Seth Brundle · 13-01-2019 6:35pm

Kimbot wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't have a dash cam so can't provide it but if I do come across it again I'll be sure to get my passenger to take a video of it.

You imply that it is a common sight so maybe come back to us tomorrow or Tuesday with that footage so!
Thanks.

mrcheez · 13-01-2019 6:38pm

Ooh ooh another cyclist thread..has anyone said "red lights" yet???

Or road tax?

Or Joe?

Kimbot · 13-01-2019 6:39pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

You imply that it is a common sight so maybe come back to us tomorrow or Tuesday with that footage so!
Thanks.

If you bothered your hole to actually read my initial response I said it's fairly common to see 2 abreast in response to the poster that said riding 2 abreast isn't common and I said in SOME cases I have seen people ride 3-4 abreast which does happen and when I do see it happen again and have a passenger in the car to safely video it then I will.

Wombatman · 13-01-2019 6:42pm

Beasty wrote: »

Starting a thread on Cycling in AH? Seriously??

Results fairly balanced so far. Surely a better reflection of Joe Public view here than in a cycling or motoring forum?

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 6:43pm

Wombatman wrote: »

What are you on about? This is very topical considering the scrapping of the minimum passing distance proposal. I cycle to work every day. Where am I bashing exactly?

Ah, you must not be aware of AH's history with cycling related topics. Or else, the most likely is that you are very aware.

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 6:48pm

mrcheez wrote: »

Ooh ooh another cyclist thread..has anyone said "red lights" yet???

Or road tax?

Or Joe?

Footpath, traffic jams, roads built for cars...

StinkyMunkey · 13-01-2019 7:01pm

I drive cars, motorbikes and cycle. Personally I think single file is best in urban areas, while over taking cyclists I like to leave a large space between me and the cyclist in case they changes Road position suddenly.

When over taking cyclists 2 abreast it means I've to move further over the opposite side of the road, in urban areas this can be dangerous unless of course the cyclists are in a bus lane, then it's a non issue.

The only time cycling 2 abreast makes sense to me is when it's a large group of cyclists on regional roads, I'm happy to wait until it's safe to overtake.

In large towns or cities a cyclist has no business cycling 2 abreast. I personally take other roads users into consideration when using the roads, no matter your mode of transport, others should exercise the same ethos.

I hate people who are militant when using the roads, whether they be driving a vehicle, using a push bike, pedestrian or any other type of getting from A to B.

Inconsiderate people are the problem, not the mode of transport.

Lefty Bicek · 13-01-2019 7:01pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

You imply that it is a common sight so maybe come back to us tomorrow or Tuesday with that footage so!
Thanks.

Three is a common sight on the old N7, morning, noon, or night, particularly in the environs of the Birdhill roundabout.

I am not referring to the 'peloton' :rolleyes: of the Summer evenings, with the marshals, flags, and flashing ambers everywhere. A few domestique fantasies lived out there, no doubt, as they take up the whole lane.

amcalester · 13-01-2019 7:16pm

Sam Quentin wrote: »

https://youtu.be/E9eSYSjDrDo

Why not show the video of you dangerously passing a single cyclist at speed on the same road?

You know the one where you were only holding the road.

mrcheez · 13-01-2019 8:38pm

Sam Quentin wrote: »

https://youtu.be/E9eSYSjDrDo

Looked at that whole video, the only available opportunity to overtake a SINGLE line of cyclists while providing the requisite 1.5m was right at the end.

Had it not been for the 2 abreast there would have been attempts to squeeze by the group.

13-01-2019 8:44pm

Definitely not but really the horse has bolted. The rise in popularity of cycling means that country roads are filled with groups of cyclists riding 3-4 abreast no less two.

I'd prefer if cyclists judged the road and went single file in narrow country roads but that just doesn't happen. So making two abreast legal will just add to the problems there already with cyclists asserting their "right" to cycle two abreast instead of using their judgement based on road conditions.

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 8:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Definitely not but really the horse has bolted. The rise in popularity of cycling means that country roads are filled with groups of cyclists riding 3-4 abreast no less two.

I'd prefer if cyclists judged the road and went single file in narrow country roads but that just doesn't happen. So making two abreast legal will just add to the problems there already with cyclists asserting their "right" to cycle two abreast instead of using their judgement based on road conditions.

Evidence please. Where's your dash cam footage?

Btw, 2 abreast is totally legal at the moment. There is nothing about "making two abreast legal".

In all honestly, cyclists ahead of cars are in a much better position to judge what is safe or not. Give a motorist an inch and many will squeeze by risking the cyclists life.

tuxy · 13-01-2019 8:50pm

I think the important thing is for cyclist being assertive and using the correct formation for the road conditions.
It's very important not to go single file until it is safe for cars behind to overtake as this move can be seen by motorists as indication that all is clear.

13-01-2019 8:51pm

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Evidence please. Where's your dash cam footage?

Oh go away with your annoying posts, i really couldn't be bothered engaging with you:rolleyes:

spyderski · 13-01-2019 9:03pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Definitely not but really the horse has bolted. The rise in popularity of cycling means that country roads are filled with groups of cyclists riding 3-4 abreast no less two.

I'd prefer if cyclists judged the road and went single file in narrow country roads but that just doesn't happen. So making two abreast legal will just add to the problems there already with cyclists asserting their "right" to cycle two abreast instead of using their judgement based on road conditions.

“making it legal”? It’s been legal for many, many years.

tuxy · 13-01-2019 9:05pm

spyderski wrote: »

“making it legal”? It’s been legal for many, many years.

Wait! does that mean some motorist are also ignorant of the law and it's not just some cyclists? :eek:

amcalester · 13-01-2019 9:12pm

mrcheez wrote: »

Looked at that whole video, the only available opportunity to overtake a SINGLE line of cyclists while providing the requisite 1.5m was right at the end.

Had it not been for the 2 abreast there would have been attempts to squeeze by the group.

Sam has another clip where he dangerously over takes a single cyclist on that same road, he posted it in the dashcam thread and was rightly lambasted for the dangerous maneuver.

He removed the clip shortly after but comparing the 2 clips would show why cyclists are safer 2 abreast.

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 9:24pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh go away with your annoying posts, i really couldn't be bothered engaging with you:rolleyes:

So you can't engage when asked a question about a claim you made. Stick your fingers in your ears and go "la la, la la....I can't hear you!" :rolleyes:

13-01-2019 9:25pm

Fighting Tao wrote: »

So you can't engage when asked a question about a claim you made. Stick your fingers in your ears and go "la la, la la....I can't hear you!" :rolleyes:

la la la la la

Ah seriously though, dash cam footage??? :P

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 9:27pm

Deleted User wrote: »

la la la la la

Ah seriously though, dash cam footage??? :P

You forgot to say that you can't hear me :P

Evidence of more than 2 abreast hasn't been provided by anyone. You are not the only one. So yes, please post the dash cam footage you have proving the point you made.

OldMrBrennan83 · 13-01-2019 9:28pm

No it shouldn't but it can't be an excuse not to pass them safely though.

_

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 9:29pm

Patww79 wrote: »

No it shouldn't but it can't be an excuse not to pad them safely though.

Many people on bikes have well padded ass's already

OldMrBrennan83 · 13-01-2019 9:30pm

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Many people on bikes have well padded ass's already

Oops

13-01-2019 9:34pm

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You forgot to say that you can't hear me :P

Evidence of more than 2 abreast hasn't been provided by anyone. You are not the only one. So yes, please post the dash cam footage you have proving the point you made.

Don't have a dash cam- should get one, as obviously video proof in AH is now required to make a point of view :P

Seriously though, every weekend, narrow country roads, continuous white line- especially Sundays, 3-4 abreast is the norm in my experience. It's recommended that cyclists refrain from two abreast on such roads but in my very humble experience, they don't revert to single file on these roads.

Sorry, no evidence. It must be false so.

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 9:37pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't have a dash cam- should get one, as obviously video proof in AH is now required to make a point of view :P

Seriously though, every weekend, narrow country roads, continuous white line- especially Sundays, 3-4 abreast is the norm in my experience. It's recommended that cyclists refrain from two abreast on such roads but in my very humble experience, they don't revert to single file on these roads.

Sorry, no evidence. It must be false so.

I'd guess that you don't have great depth perception and so aren't accurately judging what you see when it comes to 3-4 abreast. However, the people on the bikes ahead of you are in a much better position to decide if single file is safer or not.

13-01-2019 9:44pm

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I'd guess that you don't have great depth perception and so aren't accurately judging what you see when it comes to 3-4 abreast. However, the people on the bikes ahead of you are in a much better position to decide if single file is safer or not.

Assuming that they know what they're doing? Big assumption considering the amount of people taking up cycling for fitness purposes but who haven't familiarised themselves with cycling safety.

Also That assumes that the cyclist knows the road better than the motorist does- on country roads, quite often the motorist knows the road better as they live in the general area so the "reading the road" argument doesn't necessarily hold true in all circumstances .

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 9:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Assuming that they know what they're doing? Big assumption considering the amount of people taking up cycling for fitness purposes but who haven't familiarised themselves with cycling safety.

Also That assumes that the cyclist knows the road better than the motorist does- on country roads, quite often the motorist knows the road better as they live in the general area so the "reading the road" argument doesn't necessarily hold true in all circumstances .

So you don't think those who have the best view point can't make a better decision that someone that can't see past them?

Maybe think of it this way....Would you not believe someone who can see to describe something rather than someone blindfolded?

John_Rambo · 13-01-2019 9:50pm

I was in the car for eight hours traveling to buy another car today on rural roads and came across a good few cyclists. Two abreast is much safer for all involved, harder to overtake when it's unsafe to overtake, easier to overtake when it's safe to overtake. Much easier to give them plenty of room too.. I'm not a club cyclist and don't cycle for recreation, but I'd encourage them to cycle two abreast all the time.

JohnnyFlash · 13-01-2019 9:51pm

I think the old cycling fad for leisure thing will soon be superseded by something else, and we won’t have to suffer pain-in-the-hole MAMILS cycling 2 and 3 abreast on dangerous rural roads. Golf was created to keep them confined to an enclosed area.

13-01-2019 9:51pm

Fighting Tao wrote: »

So you don't think those who have the best view point can't make a better decision that someone that can't see past them?

How can cyclist's have a better view point on a narrow winding twisty country road? Seriously? it's narrow, winding, twisty, probably with a continuous white line in the middle, with warning signs in advance - you don't need to be a bleed'in cyclist to read the road- it's there for everyone to see.

amcalester · 13-01-2019 9:53pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How can cyclist's have a better view point on a narrow winding twisty country road? Seriously? it's narrow, winding, twisty, probably with a continuous white line in the middle, with warning signs in advance - you don't need to be a bleed'in cyclist to read the road- it's there for everyone to see.

Sounds like a road that’s not safe pass 1 cyclist never mind 2.

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 9:55pm

Deleted User wrote: »

How can cyclist's have a better view point on a narrow winding twisty country road? Seriously? it's narrow, winding, twisty, probably with a continuous white line in the middle, with warning signs in advance - you don't need to be a bleed'in cyclist to read the road- it's there for everyone to see.

Jaysus....I can't believe you actually wrote that! Unless you have X-ray vision, they have a better view point. Actually, if you have x-ray vision they still have a better view of the road ahead.

It sounds like a very dangerous place to try and pass anyone then. The fact that there is a continuous white line would definitely show that they are doing the right thing if they cycle 2 abreast to protect themselves and you from risking everyones lives. Fair play to them.

13-01-2019 9:55pm

amcalester wrote: »

Sounds like a road that’s not safe pass 1 cyclist never mind 2.

so why cycle 3-4 abreast on such a road when recommended by cycling ireland to go single file?

"For narrow roads or where there is other traffic, the group may need to single out and it is essential that this is done smoothly maintaining the existing speed – an agreed system should be used each time e.g. inside rider moves ahead to allow the outside rider slip in behind."

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/downloads/ci%20ride%20leader%20-%20guide%20to%20cycling%20on%20the%20road.pdf

mrcheez · 13-01-2019 9:55pm

Deleted User wrote: »

How can cyclist's have a better view point on a narrow winding twisty country road?

- Positioned higher than someone sitting back behind a wheel

- Better peripheral vision (no door/structure blocking view)

- Audible cues of upcoming traffic

- Generally more alert rather than confined in a warm environment

I cycle and drive, I'm well versed in both and know how easy it is to get detached from the world around you when one drives.

13-01-2019 9:58pm

mrcheez wrote: »

-

I cycle and drive, I'm well versed in both and know how easy it is to get detached from the world around you when one drives.

remind me not to drive behind you so..:pac:

John_Rambo · 13-01-2019 9:58pm

Deleted User wrote: »

How can cyclist's have a better view point on a narrow winding twisty country road? Seriously? it's narrow, winding, twisty, probably with a continuous white line in the middle, with warning signs in advance - you don't need to be a bleed'in cyclist to read the road- it's there for everyone to see.

They're usually higher up, don't have pillars, blind spots and other visual impediments that car drivers have, they can hear things down the road that drivers can't, they're usually fit and more reactive than drivers, there's four eyes on the road if they're two abreast and they're constantly communicating warnings to each other.

amcalester · 13-01-2019 9:59pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

so why cycle 3-4 abreast on such a road when recommended by cycling ireland to go single file?

"For narrow roads or where there is other traffic, the group may need to single out and it is essential that this is done smoothly maintaining the existing speed – an agreed system should be used each time e.g. inside rider moves ahead to allow the outside rider slip in behind."

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/downloads/ci%20ride%20leader%20-%20guide%20to%20cycling%20on%20the%20road.pdf

If the road is as narrow as you describe then I doubt they are cycling 3 or 4 abreast, if they were they’d be on the wrong side of the road cycling into oncoming traffic.

Note the word may in your CI link, and then consider who gets to decide when to move into single file.

13-01-2019 10:00pm

John_Rambo wrote: »

They're usually higher up, don't have pillars, blind spots and other visual impediments that car drivers have, they can hear things down the road that drivers can't, there's four eyes on the road if they're two abreast and they're constantly communicating warnings to each other.

What are you doing here? I thought you were off finding POW's in Vietnam? :P

mrcheez · 13-01-2019 10:00pm

Deleted User wrote: »

remind me not to drive behind you so..:pac:

erm.. ok, I'll shout back to you.

Oh wait you won't hear me as you'll be cocooned in your soundproof vehicle.

13-01-2019 10:01pm

amcalester wrote: »

If the road is as narrow as you describe then I doubt they are cycling 3 or 4 abreast, if they were they’d be on the wrong side of the road cycling into oncoming traffic.

.

Oh they are, but you're not willing to believe that, so we'll leave it there.

John_Rambo · 13-01-2019 10:01pm

Deleted User wrote: »

What are you doing here? I thought you were off finding POW's in Vietnam? :P

They drew first blood, not me.

13-01-2019 10:02pm

mrcheez wrote: »

erm.. ok, I'll shout back to you.

Oh wait you won't hear me as you'll be cocooned in your soundproof vehicle.

You won't shout back at me because you're "detached from the world around you"- remember?

Wombatman · 13-01-2019 10:05pm

93 Yes and 93 No. Mad how even the split is, without too many knows, suggesting people are polarised on this.

tuxy · 13-01-2019 10:15pm

If you look at the reports of cyclists killed on the roads it's normally people out solo.

Do you think there should be more done to promote cycling as a group as it seems to be much safer?

Lefty Bicek · 13-01-2019 10:18pm

tuxy wrote: »

If you look at the reports of cyclists killed on the roads it's normally people out solo.

Do you think there should be more done to promote cycling as a group as it seems to be much safer?

Do you mean news reports ?

13-01-2019 10:19pm

tuxy wrote: »

If you look at the reports of cyclists killed on the roads it's normally people out solo.

Do you think there should be more done to promote cycling as a group as it seems to be much safer?

There are a lot of people cycling out there who know what they're doing on the roads. but with the advent of cycling as a popular pastime and form of exercise, there's a lot who don't know what they're doing.
A good group of cyclists who know what they're about are to be respected. A group who don't, are to be feared. In my experience, there's a lot of groups who don't know what they're doing and are causing problems on country roads.

amcalester · 13-01-2019 10:20pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Oh they are, but you're not willing to believe that, so we'll leave it there.

Some may, I’m not foolish enough to say it never happens. It just doesn’t happen as much as people claim, the roads just aren’t wide enough for 3 - 4 cyclists to travel side by side.

John_Rambo · 13-01-2019 10:22pm

Deleted User wrote: »

There are a lot of people cycling out there who know what they're doing on the roads. but with the advent of cycling as a popular pastime and form of exercise, there's a lot who don't know what they're doing.
A good group of cyclists who know what they're about are to be respected. A group who don't, are to be feared. In my experience, there's a lot of groups who don't know what they're doing and are causing problems on country roads.

There's a much much much bigger group of motorists that don't know what they're doing that cause much bigger problems and fatalities on country roads.

Fighting Tao · 13-01-2019 10:23pm

Wombatman wrote: »

93 Yes and 93 No. Mad how even the split is, without too many knows, suggesting people are polarised on this.

A poll like this can mean anything. it could mean any of the following or others that I haven't noted down)
1. about 50% of people have no regard for others lives and are willing to endanger their lives.
2. about 50% of people understand the importance and necessity of 2 abreast
3. about 50% fo people are just anti people not in cars
4. about 50% of people cycle

The list could go on and on.

tuxy · 13-01-2019 10:25pm

Deleted User wrote: »

There are a lot of people cycling out there who know what they're doing on the roads. but with the advent of cycling as a popular pastime and form of exercise, there's a lot who don't know what they're doing.
A good group of cyclists who know what they're about are to be respected. A group who don't, are to be feared. In my experience, there's a lot of groups who don't know what they're doing and are causing problems on country roads.

I'd actually be in favour of making it mandatory to join a cycling club that is a member of cycling Ireland. Plenty of great clubs that could give these people advice and if they wear the club jersey you have someone to report dangerous cycling to. Very affordable too <€100 a year.

Although it's probably not much use to people who commute by bike. And the last thing you would want to do is to encourage people that cycle to work to give up on it and get a car as that would cause major traffic jams.

Should cycling two abreast be allowed?

Comments